There is an almost blinding focus on kingship in much ancient Egyptian writing,
especially in hieroglyphic inscriptions and formal art, because these serve
the function of securing order (the order of kingship) for eternity. This complicates
assessment of trade between ancient Egypt and other lands; for example, a depiction
of the presentation of imports does not reveal the means by which they were
secured, because the means would have no effect on the function of eternal presentation.
Modern commentators sometimes refer to produce in such scenes as 'tribute',
but there is no special word in the Egyptian language for imports delivered
by tribute relations (that is, by obligation on a foreign ruler to deliver goods
to Egypt for no return) - the translation violates the context of the ancient
depiction, within which the means of acquisition do not need to be specified.
Were they spoils of war? gifts in international relations? tribute from vassal
states? items traded by market exchange? The answers are not provided from within
the colourful depictions of the arrival of foreign goods and foreigners.

Some key sources for trade in the archaeological record

Consider the five categories of sources below: how much information on trade
is it reasonable to expect from each? how do they complement one another? are
they enough together to provide a rounded picture?

1. excavation of material not local to the findspot

Before this category can be considered, it is necessary to establish the regular
production in the area of the findspot. Otherwise, a local item may be misidentified
as foreign. Identifications as local/foreign are prone to change over time,
as archaeologists build up a more detailed picture of the material culture of
each area.

These may be more significant than direct imports, inasmuch as they demonstrate
a greater degree of interrelation and penetration of cultures. Reasons for imitation
are likely to vary from case to case: over a longer period of time, the origin
of a motif or form may be forgotten.

These are often considered the most attractive sources, as if an ancient photographic
snapshot: however, they are not easy to read from a modern perspective, because
the rules of formal art in ancient Egypt are so different from European perspectival
art, and the purposes of that art are religious (to project order into eternity)
and therefore far from the interests of the modern economic, social and political
historian. They focus on the presentation of produce to the king and through
him to the gods as an eternal act of good; therefore they omit crucial information
required by the modern historian, notably (1) whether anything was sent in exchange,
and (2) how often the event took place.

4. hieroglyphic inscriptions recording trade

See the notes for no.3 above.

Example:

Memphis reused block from a building of the Twelfth Dynasty king Amenemhat
II, including detailed list of products brought back from trade to south
and north (note though that even in this detailed list any corresponding export
or payment is not recorded)

5. manuscripts recording trade

In contrast to hieroglyphic inscriptions, where the primary purpose is the
projection of perfect order into eternity, more day-to-day manuscripts from
court life are more likely to reveal both sides.

Examples:

Reign of Akhenaten, store of documents
of Pharaoh, Amarna: cuneiform tablets giving the international correspondence
of the day (Amarna Letters) including
detailed lists of exports, revealing gold and textiles as primary exports
from Egypt